Jump to content

transfer or pass


Shugart23

Recommended Posts

I would conject that if you use a weaker NT range ===say 13-15 , this will shade the results away from transfer and in the favor of NT....Just like 16 opposite 8 is usually a bad 3NT bid and 12 opposite 12 is probably a good NT bid, I'm thinking the larger point spread your simulation has between the two hands has skewed the result due to transportation problems ( I play 16+ is a 1C opening)

 

That is great that you ran the simulations...,Thanks for doing that and sharing the numbers

Link to comment
Share on other sites

smerriman - argh, I'll look at that. That could *very easily* be is wrong and a huge issue. Fixed, running again.

 

Luckily, I have easy ways to check that.

 

Shugart, I did more changes to this, because I really did wonder about weak NT, so now it's "set these values in the first 10 lines, ignore everything below"; test run of 12-14 gave very similar numbers. Of course if that one's wrong...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

smerriman - argh, I'll look at that. That could *very easily* be wrong and a huge issue.

 

Luckily, I have easy ways to check that.

 

Shugart, I did more changes to this, because I really did wonder about weak NT, so now it's "set these values in the first 10 lines, ignore everything below"; test run of 12-14 gave very similar numbers. Of course if that one's wrong...

 

are you planning on publishing the new numbers ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Much more reasonable, this time. Thanks smerriman - I hate dumb logic errors.

 

1000 hands processed of 40379 attempted:

 

NT scores better on 279 deals

NT one trick less on 375 deals

1NT goes down on 212 deals

2M goes down on 120 deals

8-card M fit on 730 deals

frequencies of HCP totals: [(21, 125), (22, 245), (23, 330), (24, 185), (25, 115)]

 

So it looks more like "it's a decent gamble, if you think you can beat DD by one trick more often than not playing 1NT-float." And, of course, this is ignoring the times the opponents get into the auction (which, at MPs against a NV strong NT, is "a lot"). And...

 

I think I'm staying with "save my brainpower for other hands" and auto-transfer, though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Much more reasonable, this time. Thanks smerriman - I hate dumb logic errors.

 

1000 hands processed of 40379 attempted:

 

NT scores better on 279 deals

NT one trick less on 375 deals

1NT goes down on 212 deals

2M goes down on 120 deals

8-card M fit on 730 deals

frequencies of HCP totals: [(21, 125), (22, 245), (23, 330), (24, 185), (25, 115)]

 

So it looks more like "it's a decent gamble, if you think you can beat DD by one trick more often than not playing 1NT-float." And, of course, this is ignoring the times the opponents get into the auction (which, at MPs against a NV strong NT, is "a lot"). And...

 

I think I'm staying with "save my brainpower for other hands" and auto-transfer, though.

 

cool and this is 13- 15 ?..if not, is it easy enough to run, since that is my current range

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Double dummy plays 5-2 fits brilliantly, as it knows exactly when the trumps will break 3-3.

 

In real life, if you draw a third trump and they break 4-2, you're probably in trouble, while if you don't draw a third trump and they break 3-3, you go down when it was an 'easy make'.

 

I'd say that trump fit is the most inaccurate of all situations for double dummy analysis.

 

 

But it does give a bound, whereas before we were just pontificating based on how we feel

Link to comment
Share on other sites

okay, had more fun learning more python:

 

13-15 opposite 8-10, 5M332

1000 hands processed of 40960 attempted:

 

NT scores better on 346 deals

NT scores no worse on 377 deals

NT one trick less on 330 deals

1NT goes down on 181 deals

2M goes down on 143 deals

8-card M fit on 705 deals

frequencies of HCP totals: [(21, 123), (22, 262), (23, 339), (24, 174), (25, 102)]

 

seems about the same.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

okay, had more fun learning more python:

 

13-15 opposite 8-10, 5M332

1000 hands processed of 40960 attempted:

 

NT scores better on 346 deals

NT scores no worse on 377 deals

NT one trick less on 330 deals

1NT goes down on 181 deals

2M goes down on 143 deals

8-card M fit on 705 deals

frequencies of HCP totals: [(21, 123), (22, 262), (23, 339), (24, 174), (25, 102)]

 

seems about the same.

If I read correctly, NT scores better on 346 deals and worse on 277 deals. That "seems about the same", at MP ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

okay, had more fun learning more python:

 

13-15 opposite 8-10, 5M332

1000 hands processed of 40960 attempted:

 

NT scores better on 346 deals

NT scores no worse on 377 deals

NT one trick less on 330 deals

1NT goes down on 181 deals

2M goes down on 143 deals

8-card M fit on 705 deals

frequencies of HCP totals: [(21, 123), (22, 262), (23, 339), (24, 174), (25, 102)]

 

seems about the same.

 

can you elaborate what you mean by NT scores no worse on 377 deals? If you mean NT takes the same number of tricks as 2M, then the balance is going to tip further in favor of NT than the small 346 to 330 advantage it seems to enjoy......also I am not sure why 346+377+330 doesnt toal to 1000

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"scores no worse" means "better or same" - that same "goes down the same amount as 2M". In this run, that happened 31/1000 times (or 31/143 times that 2M went down DD).

 

so in 60+% of the cases, doubledummy 2M strictly beats 1NT. All arguments about "1NT is the hardest contract to defend", "DDSims play 5-2 (and 5-3) fits much better than humans", ... come in now. It's interesting to see that fit is consistently about 70% - so only 30% of the time do we worry about the "DDSim plays 5-2 perfectly". How that matches with the 30% of "doesn't play as well" is a question, that of course I could sim up :-)

 

in 30% of cases at least, or about as many times as NT makes same tricks or better, NT loses to 2M by 2 tricks or more (which was my original point. When sitting works, it's great. When sitting doesn't work, it frequently isn't "90 into 110", it's "-50 into 110", losing to a fairly common 3m-1 the other way).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"scores no worse" means "better or same" - that same "goes down the same amount as 2M". In this run, that happened 31/1000 times (or 31/143 times that 2M went down DD).

 

so in 60+% of the cases, doubledummy 2M strictly beats 1NT. All arguments about "1NT is the hardest contract to defend", "DDSims play 5-2 (and 5-3) fits much better than humans", ... come in now. It's interesting to see that fit is consistently about 70% - so only 30% of the time do we worry about the "DDSim plays 5-2 perfectly". How that matches with the 30% of "doesn't play as well" is a question, that of course I could sim up :-)

 

in 30% of cases at least, or about as many times as NT makes same tricks or better, NT loses to 2M by 2 tricks or more (which was my original point. When sitting works, it's great. When sitting doesn't work, it frequently isn't "90 into 110", it's "-50 into 110", losing to a fairly common 3m-1 the other way).

 

It does seem that 'the herd' is right to do the transfer when holding 22-25 HCP; I appreciate seeing the numbers. SO seemingly as the numbers decrease, the tilt should even be more so...eg. 13-15 opposite 4-6......can you stay in the pretend life just a little longer and run it ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

doesn't look fun:

 

13-15 opposite 4-6, 5M332

1000 hands processed of 57490 attempted:

 

NT scores better on 168 deals

NT scores equal or better on 378 deals

NT one trick less on 280 deals

1NT goes down on 801 deals

2M goes down on 627 deals

8-card M fit on 722 deals

frequencies of HCP totals: [(17, 103), (18, 206), (19, 348), (20, 248), (21, 95)]

 

Arguments about validity of DD sim and likely competition even more so. I didn't check against par, of course.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

doesn't look fun:

 

13-15 opposite 4-6, 5M332

1000 hands processed of 57490 attempted:

 

NT scores better on 168 deals

NT scores equal or better on 378 deals

NT one trick less on 280 deals

1NT goes down on 801 deals

2M goes down on 627 deals

8-card M fit on 722 deals

frequencies of HCP totals: [(17, 103), (18, 206), (19, 348), (20, 248), (21, 95)]

 

Arguments about validity of DD sim and likely competition even more so. I didn't check against par, of course.

 

 

I wonder if these results can be used to suggest that when 5332 with a five card Major, one is always better off opening up 1M vs 1NT (given the 13-15 HCP) range/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wonder if these results can be used to suggest that when 5332 with a five card Major, one is always better off opening up 1M vs 1NT (given the 13-15 HCP) range/

There are statistics for this online. When the major is hearts, opening 1M is not a big winner (and will be a loser on all other 1 openings). When the major is spades, opening 1 is a significant advantage on the 5332 hands within NT range. There are also good system design reasons for not doing it that way but most are beyond the simple comparison of a single hand type and are therefore more difficult to quantify.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...